🎯

Fixture360 only lists fixtures from a curated set of leagues, chosen specifically to keep our prediction model accurate.

📰

Colchester and AFC Wimbledon share the spoils in a 1-1 draw.

📝 Match Report

How It Unfolded

Colchester and AFC Wimbledon finished level at 1-1 at JobServe Community Stadium, Regular Season - 33, in the League Two. With the result on the board, the sections below measure it against everything the model and the numbers projected in advance.

The Model vs The Result

The Poisson model went into this projecting Colchester 0.83 xG and AFC Wimbledon 0.80 xG, a combined 1.62. The scoreboard read 1-1 for 2 actual goals. Both sides finished within a goal of their individual projections, so the scoreline sat close to the model's expected shape. Those figures were built on strength ratings of Colchester attack 0.96 / defence 0.85 against AFC Wimbledon attack 0.88 / defence 0.66, drawn from 77/77 games (CurrentSeason).

On the result, the model split it Colchester 33% | Draw 37% | AFC Wimbledon 31%, with the draw its most likely call at 37%. That is exactly how it finished — the model's leading outcome was vindicated.

Goals & Markets

The model rated Over 2.5 goals at 22%. The game delivered 2, so it stayed under — a call the model got right. Over 1.5 had been 49% and landed. On both teams to score, the model sat at 32% and the match saw both sides score — a miss on BTTS. Historically the two sides average 40% Over 2.5 across their same-competition games (Colchester 44%, AFC Wimbledon 36%), a base rate that agreed with today's under. Their combined BTTS history runs at 49%, which did not match the both-scored outcome.

Trading Patterns vs Reality

Colchester's trading profile (77 games, 38 home) set some clear expectations: BTTS lands in 61% of their matches — today it did.

AFC Wimbledon's trading profile (77 games, 38 away) set some clear expectations: BTTS lands in 38% of their matches — today it did; they keep a clean sheet 43% of the time, and conceded here.

Form vs Result

On form, AFC Wimbledon arrived the stronger side — 1.57 PPG against 1.13. The form guide was only half-right: the stronger side did not lose, but could not convert the edge into a win.

Verdict

Grading the result against the stored data, 2 of 4 pre-match signals came in: result (hit), Over 2.5 (hit), BTTS (miss), form (miss). The model got the gist right while missing on the margins.

💡 Key Insights